Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Claims That Apple Did Reject Google Voice iPhone Application
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's true, and of course applies to pretty much any public corporation out there.
At the end of the day, it's about the shareholders and EPS. The leadership comes and goes, but earnings is the bottom line. Often the bottom line coincides with delivering great products and satisfying customers, but it is not always a 1 to 1 correlation.
I think it's best not to get 'religious' about any company. You can love a product and more or less love a company, but at the end of the day financial considerations are what drive a public corporation. I don't consider it good or bad, it just is (a private corporation of course can be driven entirely by the whims of the owners.)
At the end of the day, it's about the shareholders and EPS. The leadership comes and goes, but earnings is the bottom line. Often the bottom line coincides with delivering great products and satisfying customers, but it is not always a 1 to 1 correlation.
I think it's best not to get 'religious' about any company. You can love a product and more or less love a company, but at the end of the day financial considerations are what drive a public corporation. I don't consider it good or bad, it just is (a private corporation of course can be driven entirely by the whims of the owners.)
Ok.
So let's see all the vastly superior Android, BB, and WinMo offerings. Where are all the "competitors"? Rogers is marketing the living daylights out of Android up here in Canada and no one's buying. And it isn't because of Rogers. I'm told it's because of the iPhone. Yes, the restrictive, closed jewel of Apple's dictatorial crown.
And everyone wants one.
If you look at things from that basic analysis, sure you are going to find comparisons. I never doubted that. But you cannot deny that the development of OSX applications versus iPhone development is very different. Focus on the differences instead of looking for similarities. Apple takes a different approach to the Mac as a whole versus the iPhone because they are targeted differently. Not to mention the technologies that are involved in the two systems are handled differently.
You might as well ask what if Google decided to take a restricted approach to Chrome OS? Or how about what if Microsoft purchased Android and change its licensing? What does development of OSX have to do with the iPhone? they are similar platforms, but what happens on one doesn't necessarily translate to the other. In fact Apple's behavior with OSX suggest the exact opposite happens (I refer to the open sourcing of Grand Central Dispatch)
please reread your own posts.
Well most iPhone owners outside of the US do know what they're missing or jailbreak their devices to rectify the problem. I see so much conservatism from US citizens in this forum but in a way I understand the reason for this. In most other countries we have fully working 3g cellular connections with 7.2 Mit/s or more that we can use to whatever we like. AT&T are just starting to deploy 3g in their network and also MMS that was introduced here in Sweden in 2002. AT&T and the US is stuck in the 20th century but the rest of the world is not. But the rest of the world suffers from the restrictions that Apple have set due to the "non-agreement" between them and AT&T.
I'll make no apologies about saying I don't live in the US, and therefore don't have access to Google Voice. I'd love for it to be available outside the US but it isn't. I use a virtual PBX for my VOIP calls (pbxes.org) now, but the functionality of Google Voice is impressive. But as an owner and professional user of four Macs does that mean I shouldn't care about what the company is doing with its products?
I think this is a very good point. I mean everyone is pointing to the 1984 commercial and saying "Oh the irony!" (I did it too). But really, when has Apple ever really been an open company? One of the basic precepts of its computer operation has been control of both hardware and operating system, to largely positive effect.
Again, this is why we provide those examples. I am not saying that it will happen, nor am I saying that Apple w/ Mac OS X is any less open than Microsoft. However, Apple has said that the iPod Touch/iPhone is a "handheld computer." If it is a "handheld computer" why is it I can't run the apps that I need and want on my "handheld computer." This is why the scenario was presented in the first place. That's where our attentions and our arguments lie.
I personally feel that Apple should stay out of what an app's content is and concentrate more on what true violations to the app store really are. This would streamline their process as well as give app developers confidence in building truly awesome apps.
w00master
Are you claiming that Apple is being anti-competitive? Are you aware that you, as a consumer, are able to purchase other phones?
I don't agree with all these "consumer protection" claims. It seems that today's consumer has caught the entitlement bug. Just because something that you wish for doesn't exist with a certain manufacturers product or a certain suppliers service does not make said product or service anti-competitive. Do some research and buy another product/service.
Apple, as an American company, has the right to operate in any way they see fit as long as they operate within legal boundaries. I fail to see how rejecting an App is encroaching on your rights as a consumer. Your right, as a consumer, is to purchase and use the product and service pair that makes you content. This is not fanboy, apologist logic. This is simply capitalism.
I do. I requested an invite from Google and received a reply a couple days later. I'd really like to start using it.
I run a small business internationally, and would like to use my google voice number as a contact. Just to keep my phone from ringing at 3am, with a customer from Japan. Right now, the only contact option I give is email, which can be a little slow compared to a simple phone call.
Seems the only folks who know what GV does ON THE iPHONE are the Google developers and the Apple review committee. Anything else is pure speculation and should be ignored.
My philosophy is that if you don't like the store because they won't sell your stuff, touch cookies for you because it's their choice what to sell and what not to for whatever reason they want to give you.
Google is taking the initiative (money and investigation) to open a service that simply will replace the current mobile communications scenarios.
Of course it wont bring only many advantages for your stereotyped
characters but for many people that can benefit in various ways for it.
Also i think that you're getting the wrong ideia. You can redirect your google number to any mobile or landline phone, also you can get emails or sms if you're out of these networks but you have a internet (like a wifi spot). It's quite impressive since this technology will be scalabe to more devices (the protocol can accept video etc).
What's funny about all this is Google is not even pushing it. They have too much at stake to make a stink about Google Voice.
There's Google Search which is embedded in Safari on the iPhone, Mac and Windows.
There's YouTube which is included in QuickTime X, iMovie '09, iPhone, Nano, Apple TV, etc.
There's Google Calendar which is supported by iCal natively in Snow Leopard.
There's Gmail which is an automatic option on the iPhone and Apple Mail.
There's Google Maps which is used on the iPhone and from within iPhoto and Address Book.
I wouldn't put it past Jobs to pull all of those out in one swoop — BING! That's likely why they requested confidentiality.
There's Google Search which is embedded in Safari on the iPhone, Mac and Windows.
There's YouTube which is included in QuickTime X, iMovie '09, iPhone, Nano, Apple TV, etc.
There's Google Calendar which is supported by iCal natively in Snow Leopard.
There's Gmail which is an automatic option on the iPhone and Apple Mail.
There's Google Maps which is used on the iPhone and from within iPhoto and Address Book.
I wouldn't put it past Jobs to pull all of those out in one swoop — BING! That's likely why they requested confidentiality.
And Google supports it too. However, it still doesn't matter since the app never sync'd the contacts to Google according to every report I have read about the app.
Well for those of you that want GV, there's Android, for example, or whatever other platform offers GV and all the other goodies you can't get with the iPhone. Dump your iPhone and switch to a more open platform. It'll probably cost you less, too.
If one platform doesn't have the features/apps you want, then just switch to another. It's just that simple.
Any takers?
If one platform doesn't have the features/apps you want, then just switch to another. It's just that simple.
Any takers?
This sure wreaks of the lawsuit against Microsoft for having unfair advantages with it's competitors by having the App development in the same facility as the Core. Oh well.....
If there was an expectation that the computer and operating system be able to make 911 calls to save our lives, then I think we would both want some enforcement of quality/stability.
I think Apple and ATT would be sued, class action style, if the phone was unable to make phone calls reliably.
How about Apple open the AppStore wide-open, allowing all apps without approval. Then each time you install an app that hasn't been approved by APPLE, you get a warning "This app has not been approved or tested by Apple, and may ruin your Apple User Experience. Install at your own risk. Accept/Decline? Are you Sure?"
Those wanting the guaranteed "Apple User Experience" can set a preference to not show any unapproved apps at all, and will have things the way they are now. Those who'd like to be treated in more adult fashion and install whatever they want would also be happy. Lots and lots of happy iPhone owners, sounds like a good thing for Apple I'd have thought...
So do the apple-apologists have a problem with this setup?
Those wanting the guaranteed "Apple User Experience" can set a preference to not show any unapproved apps at all, and will have things the way they are now. Those who'd like to be treated in more adult fashion and install whatever they want would also be happy. Lots and lots of happy iPhone owners, sounds like a good thing for Apple I'd have thought...
So do the apple-apologists have a problem with this setup?
I am getting an android phone as soon as my iphone contact is up. I purchased an iphone and mobile me when the first iphone was fairly new, then upgrade to the 3g. Since then I have come to realize that googles mail and calendar are far superior to apples. I am letting my mobileme run out and once i can find an android phone i like on Verizon or ATT I going to switch. I would prefer not to because I love how the iphone sync with my mac, but considering 95% of the apps are useless to me (the only ones that are useful can be easily replicated from a web browser) I really don't see the point.
Apple is a business who's main goal is to make money for it's stockholders. Apple is no better or worse then Microsoft and other businesses.
